Comments

That's generally true, though not always. All statistics have a base maximum of 18, but some races and classes have adjustments to that, both up and down. If you have a class with a high minimum - like the 17 charisma for paladins for instance - that makes it a lot easier to roll a high total.

I've heard that the odds of rolling 108 are worse than the odds of winning the lottery.

I think the game rolls 3d6 for each stat? Without minimum scores, one in every [100*6^(6*3)] rolls is going to be a perfect all-18 score and 18/00 strength: one in every ten million billion. With minimum scores, your odds will look a little better, but not much..

On the upside, if you're going to walk to Alpha Centauri and roll the dice once for every step along the way, you should statistically see about four perfect rolls.

I've heard that the odds of rolling 108 are worse than the odds of winning the lottery.

I think the game rolls 3d6 for each stat? Without minimum scores, one in every [100*6^(6*3)] rolls is going to be a perfect all-18 score and 18/00 strength: one in every ten million billion. With minimum scores, your odds will look a little better, but not much..

On the upside, if you're going to walk to Alpha Centauri and roll the dice once for every step along the way, you should statistically see about four perfect rolls.

That seems a bit pessimistic to me. Exceptional strength isn't relevant to the majority of characters and minimum scores will make a considerable difference. I suspect your chances of an all 18s roll is probably more like one in 30 million million - should be one along any moment now .

When I get a roll of 97 or over, I export them lvl 1. I want to try LoB from lvl 1, so I need the very best! So far I have a gnome F/M with 98, a C/R 98, a half-orc F/T 97 and the bard. 2 more ! Hopefully a sorcerer and a dwarven defender for a perfectly balanced butt-kicking session. No hamster needed.

Also keep in mind that the game is much, much easier to play if you roll high. That can be either a good or a bad thing depending on your playstyle, but if you want to be challenged then you'll likely have to up the difficulty level (as Durmir suggests).

I've rolled about 5 or 6 in the 96-98 range (always eleven sorcerers or Gnomish cleric/mages), and a single 101 Cavalier, but i don't really like paladins so i didn't think it was too special (and I will usually CRTL-8 them anyway to avoid MAJOR frustration with their core stats or just to put 18/00 on whatever the rest of their roll is).

i don't really pay much attention to the total just the stat spread I want for those casters:

As much STR as possible for carry weight and in case of C/M, to wear gear like Plate or tower shields.DEX maxed is no brainer for ranged THACO and AC bonus.Yeah, the CON is superfluous but I'd rather have them nearer to 19 or 20 if I happen to take them to the Machine of Lum the Mad or through BG1, instead of wasting those 2 point in CHA, which is frankly all or nothing in BG2 (it's much cooler in BG1). I always plan my Mages to be able to wish so high INT + WIS is a must.

Rolled a 100 for a totemic druid once. Kind of a waste for a glorified summoner (but still cool!). I've also rolled many 95-97's for cleric/ rangers, elven archers and paladins and one 98 for an elven dragon disciple.